Wednesday, December 10

Stern Speaks

Bill Simmons' most recent podcast on ESPN contains an interview with Seattle's favorite commissioner, David Stern, and while Stern danced around questions with the grace of Fred Astaire, he did provide listeners with some interesting pieces of information.

None greater than his response to Simmons' query about the sad state of affairs surrounding the Sonics' departure and relocation to Oklahoma City.

"Everyone agreed," Stern stated, "that a new arena was necessary. Exactly how it would be funded became the issue, and that issue became contentious."

Of course, by "everyone," he means everyone affiliated with an NBA franchise. And by "the issue," he means the issue the NBA wanted to focus upon.

Lord knows, David Stern didn't think a new arena was necessary less than 10 years ago, or else he wouldn't have commented to a Seattle reporter that KeyArena was one of the best arenas in the league.

Funny how time changes one's perspective.

But that falls short of the most revealing part of the conversation. Early in the podcast, Stern rebuked Simmons for the host's statement that a handful of teams might be in financial trouble, claiming that the NBA's group of owners are sufficiently wealthy enough to withstand any economic "downturn."

And yet, less than 10 minutes later, he made this comment in regard to Seattle's chances at landing another team:

"This economy is going to contain certain disruptions, and out of those disruptions may come opportunities for some cities, and Seattle may be one of them."

Sadly, Simmons failed to point out Stern's hypocritical statements, although he did his best to get the commissioner to admit that what happened to the Sonics was beyond sad. Obviously, Stern knows as well as anyone how perilous the situation is in cities such as Memphis, and that big, fat carrot called "relocation" is being dangled in front of Seattle's politicians.

What remains to be seen, though, is if any of them are interested in biting.

9 comments:

Crow
said...

Mid or long term which of these is growing to grow the most or fastest?

a) arena revenue from bigwigs attendingb) arena revenue from corporate supportc)arena revenue from fans who like to pay the standard pretty high charges to see the gamed) local tv revenues supported by fans who prefer tv or lower cost and the advertiser that prefer that channel over the arenae) merchandisingf) franchise value affected by local wealth and status-seeking behavior

NBA obviously pursues money on all fronts but maybe they have emphasized arena revenues to the max and growth potential over longterm might be ever more to the other streams.

Almost all of these on average would probably favor bigger markets on average, I'd think but obviously pro sports competition is a big factor too.

I´m from Iceland so I don´t understand this completely, how can teams be moved from one city to another, what a bullshit. I have been a supporter of Seattle Supersonics since ´88 but now I don´t even care about the NBA. What a fucked up league. But I hope that someday you will get a new Supersonic team back to Seattle sooner than later though

I´m from Iceland so I don´t understand this completely, how can teams be moved from one city to another, what a bullshit. I have been a supporter of Seattle Supersonics since ´88 but now I don´t even care about the NBA. What a fucked up league. But I hope that someday you will get a new Supersonic team back to Seattle sooner than later though